hi Cody,
I really appreciate your time and attention here.
Cody Bahir <[log in to unmask]>:
> The study of magic, (or esotericism)
I'm curious how you understand the relationship or
the distinction between 'magic' and 'esotericism'.
> as far as I know, has not evolved to adequately be
> applied to non-Western traditions, China included.
I'm confused. isn't that what started such magic
studies, with Levi-Strauss, Trevor-Roper and others?
> Though China clearly has traditions and practices
> which fall under the terms alchemy and shamanism.
absolutely. Michael Strickman, Suzanne Cahill,
and Kristofer Schipper (even, if you like, Eva Wong)
seem to very adequately cover both alchemy (such as
that of Ko Hung etc.) *and* magic (of which alchemy
is an example, obviously?). I don't know how the
term 'shamanism' applies here. perhaps the folk
magicians and sorcers would be covered there.
> It would not surprise me, however, were they to
> use Daoist alchemical terminology. I actually
> would be surprised if they did not.
sounds fine. as such, that'd be a reasonable means
of identifying at least an example of magic within
Chinese culture.
> But the term "magic" in Chinese, is not easy to
> pinpoint.
VERY interesting. the alternative route would be to
attempt to ascertain how they would describe things
like Harry Potter, or Fantasia, or stage magic, or
the spells and charms and amulets that i *know*
exist at a street magician/sorcerer level in China.
> In certain texts, the word "spirit" or "god",
> i.e. *shen* ??? is sometimes used to denote
> magical powers and rituals and others the term
> is rationalized, (usually by the Confucians,
> even 3000 years ago) meaning intelligent insight.
fascinating.
> The latter usually in the context of commentaries
> on the Yi Jing (I-Ching) where its divinatory
> powers are explained as simply being the application
> of wisdom and experience to reading into present
> situations. Though in the first chapter of the
> Zhuangzi (Chuang Tzu) it clearly has magical
> connotations and is used to describe Liehzi,
> (Lieh Tzu) who was able to "ride the winds into
> the heights". Throughout most Daoist literature,
> this term has magical connotations.
yes, this sounds very familiar. I know in tales
of Taoist immortals (shih) by Eva Wong she is plain
about mentioning their magical powers, and the 8
Immortals all have their special abilities.
> On the other hand, the term denoting shamanism,
> *wu* ??? is exclusively used in a magical sense.
ah there's the connection with shamanism. I'm
curious whether this is a Western overlay or if
it somehow relates to the Tungus peoples, or if
'wu' may also be translated in other ways.
> But I have never viewed a Chinese text of Tian Gong,
> only their English handouts and thus I do not know
> if they utilize this term. Tian Gong is not a
> phenomenon I have never actively researched.
understood, thanks for addressing this so succinctly.
> * do the people in question do things which
> they do not describe as 'magic' but which
> you, in your own culture, would identify
> as such? if so, what are those things and
> how do they describe or explain them?*
>
> I have yet to find an adequate set of guidelines
> to define magic that works across the board,
> cross culturally.
oh my goodness. is that because there isn't yet a
well-developed lattice to begin this kind of a
study, or because you haven't looked for it, or?
should we be making a few optional alternatives
within this email list to assist with the study?
I would like to note that i can distinguish *2*
kinds of 'your culture' here: 1 is your own as a
participant in your own ordinary community and
1 as a participant in your academic community.
you seem to make similar discernments in your
posting and i am trying to follow them.
as i am not part of a faculty which instructs
me as to these standards, i only have my own to
use here, and those i am attempting to glean
from the academic (anthropological) community
of my awareness. I hear you saying that you do
not have awareness of any standards within the
field of your discipline for this evaluation,
which seems to me somewhat surprising.
am i misunderstanding you somehow?
> Though I do believe their communication with
> extra terrestrials, (telepathy, invocation, etc.)
> would qualify. Also, qi manipulation is a
> wonderful example of what I, personally,
> would put into this category.
excellent, that's the kind of evaluation that i
was hoping to inspire -- something which sought
to identify your own, and your academic, standards
of magic-evaluation. I am not attempting to make
any of these here, or to force you to adopt any
particular ones, just try to identify some of them
and see where they exist, who espouses them, etc.
> From my few conversations with practitioners,
> these powers are not seen as unearthly or
> inherently magical, merely potential within
> ourselves to be unlocked, (this sounds a lot
> like certain definitions of magic, however).
yes, it reminds me of Indians describing 'powers'
or 'siddhis', which may be distinguished from
'magic' in a more formulaic sense with spells.
> So I do not think that it is clear whether
> they view them as magical, or not,
I am assuming that you are talking about
Tian Gong participants here.
> since many practitioners of magic believe that
> "every act is a magical act" so to speak.
many practitioners of Tian Gong believe this?
or many practitioners of your local groups
believe this? who believes this, by your
estimation? thanks.
> I hope this helps!
it does, very much. :)
nagasiva yronwode ([log in to unmask]), Director
YIPPIE*! -- http://www.yronwode.org/
-----------------------------------------------------
*Yronwode Institution for the Preservation
and Popularization of Indigenous Ethnomagicology
-----------------------------------------------------
|
